Leaderboard

The thing is...today's youth are better behaved than their parents were at that age: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/the-kids-are-more-than-all-right/ http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/06/13/kids-better-behaved-than-parents-were http://www.vox.com/2014/5/25/5748178/todays-teenagers-are-the-best-behaved-generation-on-record http://johnjayresearch.org/rec/files/2013/10/databit201304.pdf We live in a world where the bad stuff that happens is published instantly online--stuff that had been happening all along; when you were a teenager, when I was a teenager, when my kids were teenagers. It's just that we're constantly bombarded by those that do wrong. Statistics show that parenting styles affect teenaged behavior, and parents must be doing a better job overall, because teens are better behaved now that in the past. In my opinion, the answer to "What's the problem???" is that there is too much sharing of bad stuff and not enough sharing of the good stuff. In a post from a friend of mine on Facebook, there is a quote with a picture of a police officer that says something regarding the problems in this world are the fault of an "entire generation" of spoiled brats and youth who feel entitled. And to me, that's a huge problem. Why do we keep blaming the entire generation of young people for problems? There are less and less people acting badly now than ever, but we keep telling these young people that they're selfish, spoiled and out of control. I'm tired of reading it, frankly. I know a lot of youth aged 18-24 who are incredible people! They work hard to get good grades, work hard to find employment, work hard at their jobs, spend time volunteering in their local communities, give to charity, they work to keep themselves fit and eat healthier diets, they babysit their younger siblings (and some older siblings too!), run errands for their grandparents, do missionary work for the church. In general, parents are doing a great job of raising their kids.

People are different. My ex-wife was very uncomfortable with males, other than me giving her a hug. From my personal observation, those who did it once and did not read the signs had a problem and were probably people who should not be hugging other women. Working in a hospital where I had a lot of interaction with patients, fellow employees, and family members, I made it a rule that I would never initiate contact with a female. I would wait for them to initiate the contact and I would respond in like manner.

I'm wondering why the Spring Valley High School students staged a "walk-out" protest supporting the deputy who got fired .... students don't usually do something like that unless they feel strongly about it. The student who was interviewed said the students respect the deputy, that he has been the one to stop trouble at the school.. When asked if the deputy used too much force, the student replied, "I think he did, but at the same time,... uh... it wasn't called for, but it *was* called for for him to remove her out of class." http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2015/10/30/hundreds-of-students-stage-walkout-supporting-fired-officer-ben-fields/ It really sounds like the quandary is how the young lady could have been removed from the class without using force. On the videos, where the deputy appears to toss the student – it appears that he may have been trying to keep her from hitting other students as she was flailing about.

The question I continue to ask, with no answer except to say it was all her fault. I doubt anyone here would treat their own child that way so why should someone else be allowed to do so? What is being missed is the proper methods of handling such a situation. The officer is to blame for his being fired. The student deserves to be blamed for disobedience but not the improper treatment. By the way, GM, I suggested was, if the student tried to defend them-self after being thrown across the room, not before, would it not be understandable. What is also being missed is the very real possibility of being injured when thrown across the room, would people still blame her then? What if her neck had been broken? I'm would be willing to bet that some change in policies and procedures will be looked into and hopefully made. We are very quick to 'fix' blame with out any real facts, only video and media reporting, tis the human condition! We includes myself.

By all metrics that you use, fccool, I should be an athiest/agnostic who hates Christianity, Ellen White, the SDA church, and all Christians. However, I am not like that at all. I see Christianity as the answer to all the world's problems. I see Ellen White as a messenger from God. I see the SDA church as a church set up by God, and I see Christians as a force for good in the world. I was abused by a family that claimed to be SDA Christians. To this day I have no relationship with any of my family and that is because of their choice to view me as someone not worthy of any respect. I was abused by those who used Ellen White as their justifcation for abusing me in many instances. And, my abuse was often justified as the will of God because I wasn't like my family in temperament. All of those things should make me bitter against everything that I hold dear in life. The only possible explanation for that is free will. I chose to research all these things myself. To find out the truth about them for myself. In the world's view, which ignores the power of God, of course the only thing that matters is past experience. It cannot, and does not want to, account for the miracle of God's grace which gives to every man the choice to follow God and be truly free, or the choice to follow the devil and be in bondage. Since the entire world is in bondage to the devil it is no wonder they think free will is a myth.

Amazing ... if I had attempted to fight a police, if I had created such an issue in school that one had to be called, being bounced across the room would have been minor compared to what I would have got when I got home!!! When are we going to start teaching our kids respect ... respect for the rules at school and respect for our law enforcement community. Respect for each other. 16 years old is old enough to know the difference from right and wrong. If the girl had psychological issues she should have been in a special school. Important lesson which our kids need to be taught early in life: You fight with a police officer, you are going to loose!!! The videos, especially one, show her making the first physically aggressive move. I believe that constitutes a crime. It is said that the Sheriff did not stand behind his deputy. Any boss (manager) who does not support his personnel IMHO is suspect of being a weak manager.

October 31, 2015 NAD Year-end Meeting Day Three: "The Collaborators" Daniel Jackson, president of the North American Division of the Seventh-day Adventist Church presents the Sabbath Sermon titled "The Collaborators", on October 31, 2015. ©2015 NAD Communication/Dan Weber NAD President Jackson says Church called to collaborate with God October 31, 2015 | Julio C. Muñoz | Silver Spring, Maryland Daniel R. Jackson, president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in North America (NAD), said we serve an amazing God, who invites us into partnership with Him to reveal His grace to a world in need. Jackson, preaching a sermon entitled “The Collaborators,” challenged the delegates, families, and guests attending the 2015 North American Division Year-End Meeting Sabbath program to rely upon God’s strength, not their own, as He calls us then assures us the He will lead. The sermon was preceded by a moving introduction by G. Alex Bryant, executive secretary of the NAD. Bryant reminded the audience that exactly one year ago, he introduced Jackson, his “friend, colleague, and brother,” by saying he believed that God still had more work for the Division under the leadership of Elder Jackson. Bryant said Jackson’s re-election validated this saying, “The Lord did have more work for Daniel Richard Jackson to do in the NAD.” Following the introduction, Elder Ten N.C. Wilson, President of the Adventist World Church, was invited onstage to offer a prayer of dedication for Elder Dan Jackson and his administrative team. His wife Donna, Bryant, Tom Evans, NAD Treasurer, joined Jackson on stage along with the NAD vice presidents. Ted. N.C. Wilson, president of the General Conference, prays for the leadership of the North American Division. ©2015 NAD Communication/Dan Weber The sermon expanded on the theme of this year’s NAD Year-End Meetings, “The Grand Collaboration” which Jackson explained was not a partnership with each other, although that is vital, but rather focused on a collaboration between God and His children. Acknowledging that often God hears His people reply to His call with excuses of inabilities and weakness, Jackson said that God stoops down and reminds us “[His] grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9) Jackson emphasized that God’s call for a “Grand Collaboration” is an invitation to rely upon His strength, not ours. “God calls us to serve Him by witnessing for Him in whatever state we find ourselves,” Jackson told the more than 400 guests in attendance, and a live television audience watching the live broadcast on the Hope Channel. “At our very weakest point, with all of our self-perceived deficiencies, when we are thriving or when we are diving, God says, ‘I want you!’ His message is that as we link our arms with His mighty arm, that we become the collaborators!” Jackson set the tone for his sermon by sharing one of his favorite paintings, Emile Renouf’s “A Helping Hand.” In this painting, Renouf depicts a young girl and her grandfather in a small rowboat. The little girl, hands on the oars, believes she is paddling the boat. It is evident looking at the strong face of her grandfather that he is in fact paddling. “You are not insignificant! Connected to the will, to the might of God even our infirmities can become strengths,” added Jackson. “The weakest individual in the hands of God can become a mighty agent of His grace and salvation.” Jackson, for the most part, illustrated his sermon with the story of Debra, the only female judge mentioned in the Bible. Debra also led the Israelites in a successful counterattack against the military forces of Canaanite King Jabin and his commander Sisera. Debra stood up and led the military attack against the Canaanites when the male military leaders of Israel would not. Jackson noted that Debra “saw what was happening to her people and was personally angered by it. She couldn’t just shrug it off.” “If the church is in trouble today, then you and I have a problem,” said Jackson. “True leadership mandates full engagement with the issues that we face. There is no such thing as ducking out of the way from an issue.” Jackson concluded his sermon by asking if the audience believed that God could use a 99-year-old person, a 29-year-old, or even a nine-year-old, to accomplish his work. He then welcomed Ariadna, a nine-year-old church member from Wheaton, Maryland. Her parents Juan and Lerina Reyes, as well as their pastor Willy Benzaquen, joined her onstage. Daniel Jackson, responds to a humorous comment by Ariadna Reyes. ©2015 NAD Communication/Dan Weber The Reyes family, originally from Oaxaca, Mexico, visited many other denominations before attending the Wheaton Spanish Adventist Church. Adriadna was baptized last year at the age of 8. She then told her parents that she wanted to start a home church in their home. Her “small” group grew to 30 people, the majority her neighborhood friends aged 8-10. Soon several of those friends joined the Adventurer Club with full support from their parents. Adriadna told Jackson that this past August, her parents were baptized. Jackson turned to the audience and asked them: if God could use a child like Adriadna, couldn’t he certainly use us all? follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend read or subscribe to NewsPoints online © 2014 North American Division of Seventh-day Adventists | 12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, MD 20904 Dan Weber, communication director | Julio Muñoz, associate director Email: newspoints@nad.adventist.org | Website: nadadventist.org/newspoints

amen amen amen!!!

There ins't the slightest indication this had a single thing to do with race.To even indicate this would not have been an issue if the girl were a smart mouth belligerent white girl is simply stretching to make it racial. Imagine a class room full of students that decide to take their cell phones out during class. Why are cell phones even allowed in a class room? Great way using texting to cheat when the mood strikes. My point is that there was time, and opportunity to take a less forceful, less confrontational approach. De-escalating the confrontation between the teacher and the student was a part of that The student was asked three times.She refused to comply. To believe the girl would have calmly sat in her desk while they moved it to the hall is not to reasonable. She had already defied authority that she did not appear to believe could do anything about her challenge. While it is possible her outburst could have been influenced by the death of her mother, I am not so sure I believe that a reason,more like an excuse after the fact. It is more likely defiance of authority was a pattern.

What I'm seeing in the world today is, there is no respect for authority, period!! And the main reason, is that the children are not being taught that in the home. Parents want others to teach them that, but than are unwilling to backup the authority figures!! Back when I went to school, I had an incident happen to me and a friend. The school had a policy that no one was aloud to leave the school grounds during the day. Well me a friend decided that we would violate that, so we snuck out. When we returned the principal wanted to know where we were. I smart mouth him right of the bat, wont tell you my exact words, not very nice. He picked both of us up by the throats and lifted us up in the air. Told me never to say that again and never to do what we had done, leave the school during school hours. Called our parents. Now, did he over react? Yes!! Imagine if they had cellphones than!! What do you think my parents did when notified of what happened?? They backed the principal and when I got home, was given a spanking to boot. I look at it this way. What does the 5th Commandment say? Its asking us to honor our parents! Does it say "only when they are good to us, etc., etc." I'm not saying that the officer was right in how he dealt with the situation, but hindsight is always 20/20. according to reports this officer was very good in doing his job, and also maybe we should be looking at what all the other students are saying!! There not justify how the officer reacted but that obviously the student had been a problem throughout the year and saying to all that also over reacting by firing him isn't helping anyone! My 2 cents worth here.

Hundreds of students protest firing of ‘body slamming’ SC cop Posted on Oct 31 2015 - 4:08am by Middle East Post « PREVIOUS | NEXT » This post was originally published on this site Hundreds of students at Spring Valley High School, South Carolina walked out in protest over the firing of school resource officer Ben Fields. The sheriff deputy’s lost his job for slamming and dragging a female student out of a desk earlier this week. The students walked out of class 10 am Friday morning and into the school’s atrium for a 15 minutes protest before administrators ordered them to class. Video and photos captured the event. Students wore T-shirts that said “#BringBackFields” or “Free Fields.” “He was a great guy,” student London Harrell told local WISTV. “He protected us and everything. He was our school resource officer. We always could depend on him and everything. Every time I saw him, he was always joking around with people. It was never like ‘Oh, I’m about to body slam you.’” Principal Jeff Temoney said none of the students would be suspended if they returned to class. “We’ve heard your voices, okay,” Temoney said according to WISTV. “We appreciate you taking time to do this, but again, as you know, we always focus on teaching and learning, so let’s head on back to class.” Principal Temoney released a statement several hours later about the walkout, which said students and staff were safe during the protest. Fields, who is white, was recorded on cell phone video using force on an African-American student during a school discipline incident. When shared on social media, the footage caused national outrage on the use of force in schools and by school resource officers. Fields was fired on Wednesday. The incident led to multiple investigations by the Richland County Sheriff’s Department, the South Carolina state police, the Justice Department and the high school. The sheriff’s department interviewed witnesses and reviewed several cell phone videos taken in the classroom, and concluded the moves Fields used in the confrontation were “not acceptable.” After talking to Fields, Sheriff Leon Lott said the deputy “tried to do his job,” but that he should not have used force against the student. While the teen was non-compliant and disrespectful, Lott said, she was not a danger to the deputy. “This has been a very difficult situation for all of us,” Lott said, urging the community to use the incident as a teachable moment. “Police officers make mistakes too, and they have to be held accountable. That’s what we’ve done,” said the sheriff, adding that the student should also be held responsible for disrupting the classroom. Fields’ attorney, Scott J. Hayes, issued a statement after the officer was let go. “We believe that Mr. Fields’ actions were justified and lawful throughout the circumstances of which he was confronted during this incident,” the statement read. “To that extent, we believe that Mr. Fields’ actions were carried out professionally and at that he was performing his job duties within the legal threshold.” Meanwhile, Todd Rutherford, the attorney for the girl, who has not been identified, revealed that the student suffered injuries to her face, neck and arm as a result of the incident.

Aubrey, this is a great post for downhill, thank you,

Kinda cool!

Joeb, I agree with post. Your overcoming the abuse is a great example of freewill. However I'm sorry to hear of your rough times. Glad to see you made it through the darkness and into the light. I'm also glad that you don't bash the sda religion as a whole because those sda's wronged you.

SENT BY THE FATHER John 5:23 "that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him." John 4:34 Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of Him [singular] who sent Me, and to finish His [singular] work." John 5:36 "But I have a greater witness than John's; for the works which the Father has given Me to finish-- the very works that I do-- bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me. 37 "And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me." John 6:39 "This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day." John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:57 "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me." John 8:16 "And yet if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone, but I am with the Father who sent Me." John 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me." John 10:36 "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world,`You are blaspheming,' because I said,`I am the Son of God '?" John 12:49 "For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." John 17:21 "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me." John 17:25 "O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me." John 20:21 "So Jesus said to them again, "Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 1 John 4:14 "And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world." THAT is what I'm trying to do. "God so loved the world that HE gave HIS only begotten Son." Right? And WHO is "God"? I Corinthians 8:6 "There is one God, the Father, AND one Lord, Jesus the Christ." No mention of a third being. Galatians 4:6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, "Abba, Father!" The Holy Spirit IS "the Spirit of His Son." THERE IS NO MENTION OF A THIRD DIVINE BEING HERE. Jesus NEVER said that He was "sent by the Spirit", or did "the works of the Spirit". It was ALWAYS "my Father", "the Father". Blessings, Rachel Cory, prophecyviewpoint.com

PS: Joeb, I do AGREE that Jesus became FULLY HUMAN when He incarnated. I agree that Jesus "emptied Himself" of divine power, and became dependent. But - I believe His God powers were restored to Him, when He was glorified. How is that possible? I don't KNOW. Jesus said, "where two or three are gathered in my name, I AM THERE in the midst of them" (Matt 18:20). How is that true - if it is another divine Being, and NOT Jesus Himself? Jesus said, "I am with you always, even unto the end of the age." How is THAT true, if it is NOT Jesus with us? Before His incarnation, Jesus was "the express image" of His Father. (Heb 1). Which means that the Son of God was "spirit" just as His Father was "spirit". If He was "glorified with the glory" that He had with His Father before the world was (John 17) THEN would not that "glory" include the capacity to be omnipresent, and omniscient, and omnipotent.

Joeb, I don't think I "forgot" anything, at least in our context of just WHO did the works of Jesus. Let's see who Jesus gave credit to, for His works. John 14:10 ""the Father who dwells in Me does the works." But THAT would mean that God our Father is not just a divine being who sits on a throne. HE is also Spirit. Jesus NEVER said, "the Holy Spirit is with me", or "My Father sent the Holy Spirit to be with me." No. He said, "the Father IS WITH ME." John 16:32 " And yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me." (NKJ) John 8:29 "And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him." And WHO SENT JESUS. At least 15 verses, just in the Book of John says the FATHER sent Jesus. Never once, did Jesus say the Spirit went Him. GOD IS SPIRIT - YES - but there is NO COMMAND to worship the Holy Spirit. We are supposed to THANK the Father for the Spirit. John 4:23 "the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." God is NOT just "one who sits on the throne". He is ALSO "spirit". God is able to appear, to HIS created beings, while at the same time HE is omnipresent as "spirit". So WHO poured out the Holy Spirit? During Christ's incarnation as a man - living on the earth, His FATHER drew people to Him. John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day." (NKJ) No mention of a third being - doing the "drawing". AFTER Jesus ascended and was glorified - with the "glory" He had with the Father, before the world was, THEN Christ's divine powers were restored to Him. How were they restored? They were restored WHEN the Father gave the Spirit to His son - "without measure". Acts 2:33 "Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and have received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear." Jesus RECEIVED the Spirit of His Father - "without measure" - from His FATHER, and then HE (Jesus) poured the Spirit upon His disciples upon the earth. Which FITS with what John the Baptist said, concerning Christ. Mark 1:8 "I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit." (NKJ) Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire." (NKJ)

Why, gatfotc, do you not condemn George Soros too? He has created organization after organization that are overtly political and funds them out of his own pocket. You find it morally repugnant that conservatives will dare put their money behind their beliefs, but yet give someone like George Soros, who is truly evil, a pass. Why?

Rachel, It looks to me as if you sometimes forget that Jesus, the man, was fully human. That means He needed the Holy Spirit, just as we do. The Bible tells us clearly that the Son of God laid aside His divinity when He came to earth, thus He required the power of God, which was outside of His humanity, to do the miracles He did, just as did the prophets of old and the disciples. In John 20:22 this is pretty plain. He "breathed" on His disciples and told them to recieve the Holy Spirit. He didn't say He was simply giving them Himself. The other thing I think that you miss out on taking into account is that Jesus was given to the human race forever. He will always be human, and as such, He has laid aside a certain part of His former makeup. He's still part of the Godhead, but He has given up His ability to be in all places at once for no human being can do that. He willingly gave that up for eternity to save us.

Parents Please teach your child respect for authority. You can be right and end up dead right!!

What I think is odd about this whole situation is that it supposedly started over the girl and her phone, yet, when the officer arrived just about every student whipped out their phone and started the video. Maybe they should have a policy of no phones in school, but then they wouldn't have video of this incident and it would be he said/she said. Maybe they should have video camera's in every classroom? What we are getting is a whole generation of people who don't respect authority, and a whole generation of adults who don't know how to deal with belligerent teens. The young girl should have respected her teacher and herself and put her phone away when class started. P.S. Yes, Coa, I am blaming her, had she put her phone away when class started, nothing would have happened, had she put her phone away when teacher asked her too, nothing would have happened, had she gotten up and politely followed the officer out of the room, nothing else would have happened. But for HER actions, SHE escalated the problem which SHE created in the first place. Did she deserve to be tossed across the room? No, and I'm not saying she did deserve that, but she created this whole problem, the blame is squarely on her shoulders.

All law-enforcement officers know the "Continuum of Force". National Institute of Justice (Federal government) Wikipedia The officer acted according to the continuum of force. The suggestion that the subject's desk be pulled from the room is excellent. I had the possibility of defusing the situattion. Law-enforcement officers can have "tunnel vision" is stressful situations, like a pursuit, bar fight, domestic violence (this is the worst) ... and do what they're trained to do: escalate to the next level of force. In this case the officer was at level 3. Levels 1 and 2 failed to gain compliance. 1. Presence and demeanor (Officer presence) 2. Verbal commands 3. Empty-hand control Empty- hand submission techniques, PPCT - Pressure Point Control Tactics, Control Tactics, techniques --- a level of force that has a low probability of causing soft connective tissue damage or bone fractures. This would include joint manipulation techniques, applying pressure to pressure points and normal application of hand-cuffs.[12][13][14] He did not escalate to Level 4. In a sense, the Sheriff used "excessive force" in his treatment of the officer. He did what was politically expedient instead of supporting his officer. What was probematic is not the officer's response. What is problematic is that it was a white-on-black incident. See? Poitically expedient. Monday-morning quarterbacks, liberals, lawyers, and courts will probably fight over this for years. Result: white officers are less likely to enforce law on black subjects, out of fear of losing a career. This puts all of us at greater risk. Something to think about. Ths school called in the officer because they couldn't handle the student. This also shifts blame from the school. Double win for them. If this sounds like a cop talking...it is. Long time ago.

#512 It's the Effort that Counts Rabbi Yeruchem Levovitz used to say, "Who is the righteous person and who is the evil person? Many people think the righteous person is one who does not transgress, and the evil person is one who constantly transgresses. But even the very righteous also transgress and even the very wicked perform good deeds. "The essential difference between the two is that the righteous person tries to overcome his desire to do wrong, while the evil person does not." (Alai Shur, vol.1, p.186; Rabbi Pliskin's Gateway to Happiness, p.222)

The interview was quite interesting. Thank you Phkrause for this post. While I am still not committed to any specific candidate, I do believe that Dr Ben displayed the same degree of class this morning as has been his personality through the years. Its good to observe that his character, under fire & on display, has not changed. His statement: "I refuse to get into the mud pit," Carson said Sunday on Fox. "The Republicans were there trying to destroy each other. I think that was a huge mistake in the last cycle. And I'm certainly not going to get into that no matter what anybody says." reflects the classic, calm dignity that has for many years been his personal demeanor.

Samie I have carefully read your replies to see what part Christ plays in us overcoming. To most Christians, His role is central. (..Christ i us, the hope of glory.. Col 1:12) So far in your replies, I have not seen His role explained. Has Christ already played His part by being slain from the foundation of the world, and being slain in 31-33AD? Or does He still play a central role today?

None of the Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists that are recounted at baptism have anything to do with the question of bearing arms, or which political party to work with. There are traditions and beliefs that many people have associated with Adventism, but that has no authority. Saying SDAs have to be conscientious objectors (or the more popular "conscientious co-operators") has no more weight than saying that all SDAs have to be vegetarians. Our religion is not that dictatorial! When I was drafted during the Vietnam War, even though I was a Seventh-day Adventist, I decided that I would bear arms and use deadly force to oppose the evil of communist tyranny. As it turned out, I was granted an exemption because I had a history of childhood asthma, and had been hospitalized with pneumonia four times by the time I was ten years old. But I believed that taking up arms would be perfectly in harmony with my faith, and anyone who sees it differently can answer to God for their willingness to allow evil to go unchallenged in the world. I did consider it worth risking my life to oppose it. I still blame liberal Democrats for losing the war after it had already been won, and thus betraying the people of South Vietnam and all those who gave their lives on the battlefield.

You say the above as if you were offering something wonderful. I consider it peddling snake oil. 1. I DON'T preach that folks are destined to hell. I teach that they are destined to death. 2. I DON'T teach that they are heaven bound (as you teach) which is snake oil, because they are not. 3. I DO teach that we are given this mortal life and an opportunity, as adults, to choose Christ and eternal life. Only then when they make this choice are their specific names written in the book of life. Even then it can be blotted out. 4. How do you think it helps anyone to tell them their names are written in the book of life, when they are not? They have to accept Christ first. 5. Even under your best-case scenario, they are worse off under your scenario since (according to you) they need to overcome to remain written there. But you just lull them into a false sense of security by not demanding that they seek eternal life at the foot of the cross. 6. And saying God knew Jeremiah from the womb proves my case. Does not say he knew Jeremiah from the foundation of the world. Only that God knew Jeremiah at the time he was conceived. 7. God foretells the future by deciding to do something, and then doing it - completely different to what you are saying. Do you believe that rubbish that some preachers preach, that God knows everything you will ever do, before you do it? Am I a Calvanist? I don't know. You tell me. I did a search of the phrase "book of life". There are 8 references to this and NOT ONE says that the all names are written there by default, as you claim.

It says in the scripture quoted that there would be a group of firstfruits. It never states that it knew each one by name. I can predict with certainty that my fig tree will produce firstfruits and then the larger main crop. Fig trees just do that. What you are implying is that God knew every fruit by name, and that those names were written in the book of life from the foundation. You have no proof for that. Likewise when Jude 1:4 says And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, ...it does not say that every saint's name is known, only that there would be saints, and many of them. If their names were known and written from the start in the book of life, that presupposes God can foretell the future, and that everything is predestined. Which contradicts you even, because then God would know which names to write in the Book of Life, and He would leave out those not predestined to make it. If the future is so accurately predicted that individual names are written from the start in the BOL, then it makes no sense to me why God, knowing everything from the start, would write in the BOL the names of even those who will not make it. Your theory wants to have its cake and eat it. In practical terms, if you believe we have to accept Jesus and overcome to keep our names in the book of life, how does this differ in practice from what all Christians believe they have to do? All that you have let happen, is let a whole lot of children and babies into the kingdom, who may grow up to choose or reject God.

Yes, I know this. Why Paul used this is an interesting question. Are you aware of Jones or Waggoner's idea on this point? You're misunderstanding the idea here. This isn't speaking of the election of individuals, which is Calvinism. Adventists have never had this idea. Adventists come from an Arminian tradition. What Adventists have asserted for well over a hundred years is that our election is in Christ, and that this is what Paul and John or other Scriptures are asserting. I'm not flying in the face of our tradition, and what Ellen White, E. J. Waggoner, W. W. Prescott, James White, A. T. Jones and many others have written. Are all of these lacking in spiritual discernment, and only you are not? Doesn't this strike you as being somewhat improbable?

I don't think it's a problem of lack of understanding on my part, but I don't think what you're saying is intelligible. It's not lack of humility that leads me to this two conclusion, but the following points: 1.In addition to Scripture, there are authors I respect, such as Ellen White, people she endorsed such as A. T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner and W. W. Prescott, as well as colleagues, and none of these has ideas like yours. 2.In more modern times, the corporate ideas have been developed by R. J. Wieland and Jack Sequeira, and while some of what you assert is similar to some of what they assert, there are able to explain their ideas intelligibly, whereas you have not been able to explain your ideas in different words, but just repeat what looks to be unintelligible ideas. If I were to ask Sequeira or Wieland (can't anymore, as he passed away) to explain an idea in other words, either of these would be happy to do so. But so far you have refused. If your idea that at the cross we, who did not exist, were attached to the body of Christ, makes any sense, you should be able to explain this idea idea in an intelligible way. You should assign your lack of ability to explain your ideas in an intelligible way as a lack of spiritual acuity on the part of your listener, but due to a lack on your own part. 3.Nobody on this forum agrees with your ideas. The closest is Robert, but I'm sure he wouldn't dispute that there is such a thing as righteousness by faith, nor would he argue that John was incorrect in 1 John 1:9 nor John 1:12, or that John needed to be "corrected", nor that John was contradicting Isaiah. The Bible teaches in the multitude of counselors there is wisdom. Do you think its possible that the reason nobody is responding to your ideas is not due to a lack of spiritual acuity on the part of everyone else but yourself, but rather due to faulty methodology on your part? I majored in theology and studied for yeas at the seminary. I have written major papers long on the themes you are discussing. There are others hear who have studied at the seminary and have worked for years with these things. There are others who, while not having studied at seminary, may know more than the rest of us, and have worked at studying the Scriptures for many years. There are certain fundamental principles that *everyone* who studies the Scriptures in a serious way knows and understands, but you violate these principles. To mention a couple of basic principles: a.One should not attempt to interpret an author without regard to the context of the passage, or without regard to what the author has written elsewhere. b.One should take into account the context of the passage under consideration. What you do is to take scattered verses out of context, and string them together in weird ways. This isn't just a person opinion I have, but you can ask others who are not involved in our discussion, who have no dog in this hunt so to speak, for a neutral opinion, and see what they say regarding the methodology you are using. 4. I have seen the fruit of your ideas, and so far, I'm not seeing good things coming from it. In particular, I see two things which concern me a lot. a.Your ideas have led you to reject the clear statements of Scripture authors as "needing correction" when their ideas agree with yours. This is extremely troubling. I don't mean just in terms of our discussion, but it causes me to worry about you personally. I think this is a very dangerous position to take. b.You don't respond positively to beautiful declarations of the Gospel, but dismiss them as "mere rehash" and so forth. We may have disagreements (I don't men specially you and I here) in this forum, but we should be able to recognize when others write beautiful and true things, irrespective of differences we may have. For example, I have had differences with Robert, but he not infrequently writes beautiful things I agree with, and I don't hesitate to "Amen!" him when he does so.

Very indeed

I really appreciate this community, and, the vigilance of the administrators to keep spammers out.